Search results for: “What Dog Food Made In Usa”

A dog owner has issued a warning after her puppy nearly died from eating a box of liqueur chocolates from under the Christmas tree.

Suzanna Dixon was Christmas shopping when her inquisitive young pooch, Narla, who was just nine months old at the time, tore open a gift wrapped box of chocolates that had been left under the tree.

Mother-of-four, Suzanna (32), returned to her home in South Shore, Blackpool, to find a scene of carnage.

She said: “When I walked through the door my first thought was ‘we’ve been burgled!’ as there was torn up wrapping paper everywhere, but then I saw Narla with the nearly empty box of chocolates.

“I know human chocolates can be poisonous to dogs so I rang PDSA and they told me to bring her straight down.”

Vets at Blackpool PDSA Pet Hospital rushed Narla in immediately, and gave her drugs to induce vomiting in a bid to flush her system of the chocolate. She’s also one of thousands of lucky pets to benefit from PDSA’s A&E service which receives funding from players of People’s Postcode Lottery.

PDSA vet, Terry Ogdin, said: “We estimated that Narla had eaten around 200g of chocolate, which is an extremely dangerous amount for a dog of her size.

“Thankfully she was brought in very quickly and we were able to treat her before the chocolate had a chance to digest.

“She was well enough to go home the same day with medications to help absorb any remaining chocolate, and went on to make a full recovery.”

Chocolate contains a chemical called theobromine, which is toxic to dogs. Signs your pet may have eaten chocolate can include excessive thirst, vomiting, diarrhoea, a tender tummy and restlessness. These can then progress to tremors, an abnormal heart rhythm, raised body temperature and rapid breathing. In flat-faced breeds like Narla, which often struggle with breathing issues, these symptoms can be exacerbated.

In severe cases, chocolate poisoning in dogs can cause fits and even death. The higher the cocoa content of the chocolate, the more dangerous it is, so dark chocolate poses the biggest risk to pets.

Suzanna wants to warn other pet owners about the dangers of chocolate to pets.

She said: “Not only did Narla eat a huge amount of chocolate, but they were also liqueur ones so the alcohol made it even worse.

“There won’t be any chocolates under the Christmas tree this year and I’d urge others to ensure they don’t leave any chocolate within easy reach.”

If owners suspect their dog has ingested chocolate, they should call their local vet immediately and let them know the type of chocolate, the quantity and likely time of ingestion.

PDSA is also warning pet owners about other festive foods that can be toxic to pets, including alcohol, grapes, sultanas, onions and garlic.

Vets advise owners to store chocolates and other poisonous foods in the same way as medicines when they have pets in their household – safely and securely. And for those who can’t resist giving their four-legged friends a little Christmas treat, a new toy or a nice long walk is a better alternative than treats.

Our dogs are natural wonders of the world. Smart, loyal, affectionate and sometimes prone to acts of self sabotage that requires the intervention of vets to save them from themselves. Bella is one such dog. She needed veterinary attention after eating something that is present in the gardens of many thousands of dog owners all over the UK.

A young dog has been saved by PDSA vets after wolfing down gravel from her owner’s garden.

Bella, a one-year-old French bulldog, was rushed into the vet charity’s pet hospital in Croydon after her owner, Victoria Sherrin, noticed she had suddenly gone off her food and was being constantly sick.

When PDSA vets examined the stricken pet they could feel something in her abdomen and Victoria (37) of Chipstead, Surrey, immediately feared the worst.

She said: “I took Bella for a check-up because she wasn’t herself at all. She started snapping at us and couldn’t keep anything down.

“I wondered if she’d eaten something odd or had worms but then the vets said they could feel a mass in her stomach and I just broke down.”

Victoria feared a life-threatening illness but an X-ray soon revealed the true cause of Bella’s woes. She’d eaten a large collection of gravel stones which were now sitting in her stomach.

PDSA vet, Laura Heaps, said: “Bella’s condition was very worrying, she was very lethargic and was suffering from diarrhoea and vomiting. We examined her and could feel something in her stomach and to be sure what it was, we x-rayed her.

“Thankfully, we’d just received a new £10,000 x-ray machine, thanks to funding from players of People’s Postcode Lottery, and the images were very detailed. When we saw the images on the screen we couldn’t believe our eyes!

“You could clearly see the gravel in her stomach and colon. Luckily because the stones were so small and unlikely to cause a fatal blockage we were able to avoid surgery. Flat-faced breeds such as French bulldogs are a higher anaesthetic risk than other breeds.”

Bella was given fluids and laxatives to try and flush her system of the gravel stones and was kept in overnight for close observation. Thankfully, she made a good recovery and was allowed home the following day after receiving the all clear.

There is a name for this type of behaviour where pets eat strange objects – known as pica. Pets, especially puppies and younger dogs, like to use their mouth to investigate objects as well as to eat. Sometimes a pet will swallow an item by mistake, even though they had only meant to investigate it.

With Bella safely back home, relieved owner Victoria said: “Bella was out of sorts for a couple of days but she was soon was back to her normal self. I can’t thank PDSA enough for the fantastic treatment she received. I’m keeping a close eye on her now to make sure it doesn’t happen again.

“She’s quite an inquisitive dog and is into everything so I’ve cleared the garden to try and ensure there are no gravel stones she can get her little paws on.”

PDSA sees many cases of pets eating inappropriate items every year. These can be fatal if they cause a blockage in the intestines. Owners are advised to speak to their vet for advice if they suspect their pet has eaten something it shouldn’t have.

Many people consider their pets as part of the family. When a person is diagnosed with a life-threatening illness, the challenges and stress from the illness become the priority, and a pet may be overlooked. A program called Pet Peace of Mind is helping families alleviate the stress of caring for a pet while dealing with an end of life situation.

"I know of countless numbers of older adults – widows and widowers, veterans, those living with chronic illnesses and those on hospice care – who have said that their pet is their lifeline," says Dianne McGill, President of Pet Peace of Mind.

Pet Peace of Mind has helped thousands of people with pet care needs and preserves the bond that exists between hospice patients and their pets through the patient’s end-of-life journey.

Non-profit hospice programs can apply to become a Pet Peace of Mind program partner. If awarded, the organization is given the education and tools necessary to run a successful program.

Pet Peace of Mind is the focus of the newest video from the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization’s public awareness campaign, "Moments of Life: Made Possible by Hospice."

Cornerstone Hospice patient Donna Sarner – featured in the video – is 68 years-old and lives in a small, rural town in Central Florida. She has late-stage cancer, which causes her a great deal of pain throughout her back, abdomen and legs, and limits her ability to care for her dogs, cats, and various other animals around her property.

The Pet Peace of Mind volunteers at Cornerstone Hospice are helping Sarner by delivering dog and cat food regularly and transporting her dogs to the veterinarian for vaccinations and medication.

"Along with caring for the dogs, our program arranged to have the stray cats she feeds spayed, neutered, and vaccinated," says Kristine Murtz, volunteer services manager and Pet Peace of Mind program coordinator at Cornerstone Hospice.

Sarner is adamant about keeping at least one of her four dogs by her side, and grateful that the Pet Peace of Mind volunteers are committed to making that happen. "She understands that it may not be realistic to have the three large dogs with her until the end, and we are already looking for loving homes for them," says Murtz.

The "Moments of Life" public awareness campaign, launched by the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, features stories from hospices and palliative care programs across the United States of patients and families experiencing hospice and palliative care first hand.

https://youtu.be/5LQ_m2aZXKQ

On a Sunday evening in July 2009, I was using my computer and my 5 year old Samoyed Bundy came in shaking his head (he had left my room approximately 15 mins earlier). I thought he was bringing me the ball because he wanted to play. He was also pawing at his mouth, so I thought he must have something stuck in his mouth. I had a look but couldn’t see anything. I knew something was seriously wrong so I jumped in the car and raced to the nearest 24 hour vet as fast as I could with Bundy in the back, still acting strangely with his head.

Luckily, the roads were empty and there was no one waiting at the vet. As we were led into the examination room, Bundy collapsed on the floor and was trembling all over. I then had to go back to the waiting room while they attended to him in the back. After a wait, I was led to the back where Bundy was in a cage and flailing about uncontrollably, which was very distressing for both him and me. I understand the vet gave him a shot of pentobarbital to knock him out. After another wait, I eventually went home but, obviously, I couldn’t sleep.

The next day, when I visited him, he was lying on a bed with lots of tubes and machines attached. He was unconscious but his paws and face were still twitching. It was tearing me apart to see him like that but I stayed for a few hours and held his paw, because I didn’t think he was going to make it. I don’t think the vets were very optimistic either because he was developing asperatic pneumonia.

I visited him every day and stayed for a few hours but I realised that the nurses have other animals to look after and duties to perform so I didn’t want to get in their way by staying longer. The vets and nurses that treated him gave him the best of care and I’m very grateful.

He remained unconscious for 3 or 4 days which, I’m told, is not usual but not unheard of either. The vets there treated him with a cocktail of drugs to try to control his twitching. They recommended sending him to a specialist centre so, after about 5 days, I drove him in the back of my car. He was still unconscious so a vet nurse sat with him, assisting with the oxygen.

The vets at the specialist centre ran a multitude of generalised tests including MRI and spinal taps but the results were inconclusive. After a day or so, he started to come around, semi conscious, but still twitching. The next day I visited, he was finally awake and when he saw me he started to whine with all the energy his weak body could muster, he could barely move but he still wanted to lick me and it became very emotional for both of us. Within a week, he got more responsive and stronger every day and was then allowed home.

As Bundy is 5 years old, epileptic fits were a possibility but I’m told that they do not last for 3+ days and the MRI brain scan had ruled out a brain tumour.

The vets that treated him thought it was likely he had come into contact with a toxin that acted on his nervous system. I wracked my brains as to what that could be as I wanted answers. The day of the episode, we went for a walk (on lead) at about 5 pm then he was shut inside the house and had his food about 6pm. There was no access to the garden and there are no chemicals around the house.

The previous day, I had put a new tick collar on him and noticed a very strong smell coming from it. I assumed that this must be the cause of Bundy’s condition somehow so I didn’t put another back on him.

When he was back home, I was feeding him brand new packets of his usual dry dog food that he likes and has had for years but, before the first episode, I had bought a different brand of food just for a change and added this to his usual food in a container, one that he had never had before (not sure if I can say the brand name, for legal reasons, but possibly the biggest and most popular brand in the world and the name is something to do with a dog’s heritage). Anyway, after a few weeks of feeding him brand new usual food strait out of the packet, I went back to adding some of his previous food on top. Within that week, he had a serious case of diahorreoa but I thought that could just be down to the drugs he was on.

A few days later (coincidentally, again on a Sunday night and about 2 hours later in the evening than the first episode), I noticed Bundy looking at me strangely and his legs were shaking. I immediately knew what was wrong and I drove him down to the specialist centre where he was again in intensive care for a week or so.

He came home very weak but, today, over six months later he is fit and healthy apart from his legs sometimes shaking when he stands. Obviously, there appears to be some residual nerve damage.

The vets at the specialist centre ran more tests the second time but still nothing was remarkable.

The four different vets that treated him between the two veterinary clinics and both episodes suspected intoxication by organophosphates, metaldehyde, (slug bait) or mycotoxins.

It was after this second occurrence that I realised that this new brand of dog food was the only common factor in both these cases. Perhaps it was contaminated?

I contacted the company that makes the dog food and arranged for an approximate 1kg sample to be sent off (but unfortunately I didn’t have the bag and batch code). The sample I sent did have small amounts of Bundy’s usual dog food mixed in (other brand). I sent it like this because this new food was added on top of his old food in a container and I wanted to know if they would even notice or just throw it away but, surprisingly, they did notice. I think, because of this, they did not run any tests.

A guy qualified in veterinary science, and who works for the dog food company, dealing with complaints of this nature, sent me a letter saying he had contacted my vet and discussed the causes of ‘tremorgens’ (a group of mycotoxins). These have been associated with Blue cheese, walnuts and compost as well as others and it was unlikely that their product was responsible.

Fortunately, Bundy has not been fed or been near those stated substances.

When I leave the house Bundy stays inside and he is always walked on a lead, he only goes into the garden if I go into the garden and the last time I saw a slug was about 10 years ago so he has very little chance of ever coming across something I don’t know about.

After a few weeks, I contacted the company’s vet again for the results of the test. I understand the tests didn’t show up anything abnormal. I wasn’t surprised at the company’s response because no company is ever going to test their own product and say something is wrong with it. He suggested that it was just one of those unexplained things, which I would have believed for the first episode but it is too coincidental for the second.

I got a bit annoyed with this guy because the way he dismissed my reasoning seemed arrogant.

He said that because they hadn’t had any other complaints, there was obviously nothing wrong with the batch and he also said that was the end of the matter and there was nothing else they would do.

Not being content with this dismissal or his arrogant and patronising attitude, I contacted a more senior person at the company and spoke to a technical director and arranged for another sample to be tested (I only had a handful left). He said it would be sent to Singapore, would take about 6 weeks and would cost a bit of money.

While I was waiting for these tests to be performed, I decided to conduct my own research into probable causes (something I should have done earlier) and discovered a few scientific papers freely available on the internet about Mycotoxins affecting dogs.

Roughly speaking, Mycotoxins are a group of toxins that form as a result of mould on numerous organic sources and can be deadly and cause a number of different conditions to both humans and animals. They can be found in both cereals and dry dog food, a fact which was omitted from the letter I was sent.

Either the veterinary guy dealing with my complaint has limited knowledge of these potential killers (for someone in his position, this seems very remiss) or he was fully aware of the potential problems but decided to keep quiet so as not to open a can of worms.

I did provide an email link to all of the papers (listed below) but it would appear that neither of the people I have been in contact with has read them, as they have subsequently provided no comment.

A number of the cases reported in the papers show clinical symptoms which are nearly identical to Bundy’s condition and, when biological samples from the dogs were analysed, Roquefortine and Penitrem A were detected and suspected as the probable cause.

A few weeks later, I received in the post the results of the sample testing (it had been sent to a lab in Victoria, not Singapore). Only four tests were performed: two types of mycotoxin, namely Aflatoxin B1 and Patulin, and also lead and permethrin.

I consider this test to be irrelevant and inconclusive due to the fact the very small sample size was statistically insignificant and they failed to test for any of the mycotoxins that are linked to tremors in dogs.(apparently there are over 30 known)

The dog food company’s sole defence was based around the fact that they apparently hadn’t received complaints of a similar nature and that their quality control is of a very high standard, and perhaps it was the other brand of dog food that caused it?

Addressing this statement, my research has indicated that detection and confirmation of mycotoxin poisoning has been grossly under diagnosed and, as far as I am aware, the specialist centre that treated Bundy did not test for this possibility. (I’m not even sure there is a commercial laboratory in Australia that tests for most of the different types).

In my case, it was only after the second episode that I realised that this brand of dog food was the only common factor that was likely to be responsible and it is possible that many dogs that have a single episode of unexplained acute toxicoses unfortunately die or have to be euthanized due to excessive trauma, poor prognosis and/or lack of financial resources so a confirmed diagnosis and connection to the dog food is not made and hence it is not reported back to the company.

While I’m confident that their quality control is of a high standard, it is unlikely that it is one hundred percent reliable and variations in the materials and process can be expected in any product.

After doing further research I discovered a Uni in the USA (Iowa State) that specialises in veterinary medicine and also test for the two mycotoxins I’m interested in, namely Roquefortine and Penitrem A.

I spoke to a Professor of toxicology from the department and he believed that mycotoxins are not well understood and not commercially tested for because of lack of demand. I provided him with bundy’s Vet case notes and his story and he confirmed that it did indeed fit with mycotoxin poisoning.

I sent a 1kg sample of Bundy’s original food to be tested at my own expense, the test came back negative so I can be fairly confident that it wasn’t the other brand to blame which I believed was the case anyway because of the timing. THIS IS WHAT THE COMPANY SHOULD HAVE TESTED FOR!

This whole incident has caused me a great deal of stress, and some days I couldn’t eat or sleep properly.

I feel that the company didn’t take my claims seriously and underestimated two important factors:

1. When I think I am right, I don’t give in.
2. I won’t let anyone hurt my dog and get away with it.

I spent most of my college fund on Bundy’s vet bills and, as he means everything in the world to me, I will do whatever it takes to protect and look after him.

I am convinced that this brand is responsible and I want them to reimburse my vet bills and make it up to Bundy somehow but I realise that posting this statement and contacting the media in other ways will effectively put an end to any chances of financial restitution. However, I will take some comfort in the hope that this might provide an explanation and quicker diagnosis to future apparent toxic poisonings.

I also feel I have been very fair and patient with the company in question and gave them every opportunity to do the right thing but, at every stage, they have seemed intent on absolving themselves from any responsibility. I can only conclude that from the irrelevant sample tests that either the company is grossly incompetent or they deliberately tried to mislead me.

If my dog had died as a result of this, I would probably be standing outside the company’s headquarters with a placard saying that their food was responsible for poisoning my dog.

My advice would be that, if your dog exhibits any acute tremors or seizure symptoms, like Bundy had, then get the vet to check for Mycotoxins (though this might be difficult in some countries) and to keep the dog food bags for future evidence if need be.

As Bundy is a Samoyed and they are not common here, perhaps he could be more genetically pre-disposed to toxins that other breeds?

If anyone has had a similar experience or can offer a different explanation, I would welcome a response.

UPDATE: 12th Feb. 2010

I decided to contact consumer affairs and they passed me onto the Pet Food Industry Association of Australia (P.F.I.A .A) and spoke to the executive manager. I provided him with Bundy’s history and my concerns and he contacted the company and said he was satisfied with their response.

It was only after I explored their website that I read their Statement of Purpose

#1 “To promote the prepared pet food industry in general and the interests of the members of the association.”

So this guy had a conflict of interest to do anything about it as I understand the association is funded by its members.

A few days later I contacted the company again and put a few questions to the guy I spoke to many times before (manager, veterinary services).

I asked him, how many people have to complain about a product before they admit responsibility.

Unsurprisingly he failed to specifically answer. He just reiterated what he said many times before, that no one else has complained of this problem so it is not their responsibility. Imagine if you went to the doctor with an ailment and they said, “Well no one else has complained of this so nothing I can do.”

I also asked why he failed to test for Tremorgenic Mycotoxins in the samples I provided. His response was that they only had a small sample and they wanted to test for as wide range as possible? (a wide range of the toxins that don’t cause tremors?)

When I pointed out that I had spoken to and expert and had the other brand properly tested for tremorgenic mycotoxins he didn’t want to know and said it was irrelevant and rudely concluded our conversation.

Thanks to other forum members I can see that in other countries they have had serious problems with contamination of their dog food products with salmonella and melamine. Anyone would have to be crazy to feed their dog this companies products.

To me it is obvious that the dog food is responsible and the company has done nothing to prove otherwise.

Craig W. 2009.

References;

Bennett, J.W, & Klich, M. (2003) Mycotoxins. Viewed 19th Dec 2009 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC164220/

Bough, M, (2006) Toxicology Brief: “Tremorgenic Mycotoxicosis in Dogs”. Viewed 19th Dec 2009 http://www.compendiumvet.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=F0E2AE6B0B7E437588DFCF8A9FCA8CAC&nm=CE+Programs&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=60963CBCF74D4156BBFCA2595B06714C&AudID=43A035C1ADDF4F5F823E087E3BEE4975

Eriksen et al, (2009) Poisoning of dogs with tremorgenic Penicillium toxins. Viewed 19th Dec 2009 http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/13693780903225821

Hocking, A.D, Holds, K, Tobin, N.F, (1988) Intoxication by tremorgenic mycotoxin (penitrem A) in a dog. Viewed 19th December 2009 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3401148?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=10

Lowes, N.R, Smith, R.A, Beck, B.E (1992) Roquefortine in the stomach contents of dogs suspected of strychnine poisoning in Alberta. Viewed 19th December 2009 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1481371/pdf/canvetj00057-0057.pdf

Schell, M.M, (2000), Tremorgenic mycotoxin intoxication. Viewed 19th Dec 2009 http://www2.aspca.org/site/DocServer/toxbrief_0400.pdf?docID=113

Virginia Maryland Veterinary Notes (2005), Veterinary Teaching Hospital, Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine, Viewed 19th Dec 2009 http://www.vetmed.vt.edu/engagement/ext/pub/VetNotes_115.pdf

Walter,S.L, (2002), Acute penitrem A and roquefortine poisoning in a dog. Viewed 19th Dec 2009 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC339273/?referer=www.clickfind.com.au

As always, there is a lot of discussion about how we can introduce laws to tackle the problem of dangerous dogs. It’s a heated debate often grounded in media hype, misguided prejudices and emotion, writes K9 Magazine’s editor Ryan O’Meara.

Rather than make kneejerk decisions on what we THINK we might know about serious and fatal dog attacks we should be prepared to focus on what we DO actually know. Agreed?

What we know should ALWAYS be the basis for what we do, rather than taking action based on what we THINK we know, particularly when it comes to legislation that has enormous consequences for decades to come.

Here’s why.

What we *think* we know is that there are certain ‘types’ of dog owners who have certain *types* of dogs that are the source of the UK’s dangerous dogs problem.

Hoodies? Status dogs? Weapon dogs? Street gangs? Drug dealers?

Well, that’s what some – ill informed, misguided types – *think* we know. Are they a problem? Absolutely. But we can categorise them a lot easier if we just accept this – a bad dog owner is a bad dog owner not because of who they are, what they look like or what they do for a living, but because of how they treat, train and use their dogs. Nothing else.

If a dog is trained to protect a drug dealer, he’s a guard dog. So if all dogs that have been encouraged to guard their owners/families are now to be categorised as ‘weapon’ dogs then we have a lot of weapon dogs in the UK.

Here’s an idea. If someone is a drug dealer, they’re a criminal. Get them off the streets. If someone is out terrorising members of the public or fellow criminals with a ‘weapon’ dog, here’s an idea – they’re ALREADY breaking the law. Get them off the streets.

So, what DO we know?

Take a look:

Cadey-Lee Deacon: Killed at her grandparent’s home by two dogs (Rottweilers) when the dog’s owner was not present. The death took place at the home where the dog’s lived. The family home.

Ellie Lawrenson: Killed at her grandmother’s home while under the supervision of her grandmother. The dog’s (Pit Bull) owner was not present at the time of the attack. The attack took place at the place where the dog lived. The family home.

Archie-Lee Hirst: Killed at his grandparent’s home while under the supervision of someone who was not the dog’s (Rottweiler) owner. The attack took place at the dog’s home, the family home, in the yard outside but the dog’s owner was not present at the time of the fatal attack.

Jaden Mack: Killed at his grandmother’s home whilst his grandmother (the dog’s owner) fell asleep, giving the dogs (Staffordshire Bull Terrier and Jack Russell Terrier) unrestricted access to the child who himself had been left on a table. The fatal attack took place at the dog’s (family) home whilst, in the same building, the dog’s owner was not physically present at the time of the attack (as she was sleeping).

John Paul Massey was killed by his uncle’s dog (Pit Bull) whilst in the care of his grandmother. The attack took place at the family home, the place where the dog lived. The dog’s owner was not present at the time of the attack.

18-month old Zumer Ahmed girl lost her life to a dog (American Bulldog) that belonged to her Uncle. The dog’s owner was not present at the time of the attack which took place in the family home where the dog lived.

On 26th of March 2013, 14-year old Jade Anderson lost her life. She was found deceased following an attack by what is thought to be four dogs. The dogs owner was not present at the time of the attack.

There are more cases like this, not just in the UK.

Breeds involved:

Rottweiler (x2 in Cadey Lee Deacon’s case, 1 in Archie Lee Hirst)

Pit Bull – Ellie Lawrenson / John Paul Massey

Staffordshire Bull Terrier and Jack Russell Terrier – Jaden Mack

Staffordshire Bull Terrier and Bull Mastiff – Jade Anderson

American Bulldog

So, 7 fatal dog attacks and 7 remarkably similar circumstances – attacks ALL happened at the location where the dog lived (dog’s family home) and in ALL cases the owner of the dog was NOT present at the time of the attack taking place.

These are the facts.

It’s not ‘status dogs’ or ‘hoodies’ or any one particular breed of dog that is responsible for killing people. It’s a lack of awareness about how dogs behave, think and react in particular circumstances. Family dogs in family homes are responsible for these 7 fatal dog attacks.

I’ll briefly touch on something from personal experience.

I have two dogs. One of those dogs gets very stressed (and I use the word advisedly) when either myself or my wife leaves the house, even for a short time. If we both leave, she settles down quickly and understands the routine involved, but if ONE of us leaves, she gets agitated, runs from room to room, stares out of the windows, paws at the doors and gets herself in to a generally unhappy state. No amount of consoling or attempts to distract her will do the trick until the family is all back together as one unit. Interestingly, my other dog does not do this. She is calm and balanced and doesn’t seem to care when people come and go, whether it’s me or my wife.

All dogs have their own individual personalities.

Forget breed traits for a moment (and please don’t think for a second that I am ignoring the importance of genetics and breeding in what makes a particular dog tick) and think about this: regardless of who the dog’s parents and grandparents happen to be, their individual personality is shaped by a hugely diverse spectrum of other, environmental factors.

My Labrador and my Rottweiler have been given very, very (almost identical) upbringings – yet one of my dogs gets incredibly agitated when either myself or my wife leaves the home and the other doesn’t care. One of my dogs is particularly fond of meeting children, one is indifferent to them. One of my dogs welcomes people who visit my home wearing a uniform with a wagging tail, the other wants to send them packing.

If you were to ask me whether I thought it’d be OK for me (or my wife) to go out and leave my dogs in the care of someone who wasn’t their owner whilst children would be present, I’d say no. Conclusively no. No. No. Not happening. No.

I’m NOT being wise after the event. I’m not being a smart Alec.

Do I ‘trust’ my dogs?

No! Of course I don’t. They’re dogs. I especially don’t ‘trust’ my dogs if I’m not even there. Placing trust in one’s dog to not eat a sausage during a training exercise is fine. Trusting a dog to behave EXACTLY how you think it’ll behave when you’re not there, isn’t. There’s no real upside to such a bet. The upside, if there is one, is; nothing bad happens. The potential downside…doesn’t bear thinking about.

Think about this; have you ever been to someone’s home where there’s a dog and the dog’s owner is not there? The person who feeds the dog, trains the dog, can CONTROL the dog is away and the dog’s been left with someone who, whilst they may know the dog, doesn’t really have the same connection with it as the owner? I have. And it can be quite an interesting experience. A dog that spends a few hours ‘acting up’ or being naughty/aggressive/unruly/unpleasant to be around suddenly turns in to soppy, obedient puppy the minute they’re reunited with their master.

I’ll relate a true story about the most dangerous dog I’ve ever encountered.

My (now) wife worked at a quarantine kennels for a while. I worked at kennels in the next county as a dog trainer. We were both experienced working in kennels and, as anyone who’s worked in kennels will know, you get to see ALL elements of canine behaviour. Dogs are placed in a different setting and their owners removed from the environment and it’s then that you get to see which dogs are happy to be without their owners but perhaps get upset at being in a strange, funny smelling, noisy environment.

You get to see which dogs just pine and pine for their missing friends. You get to see which dogs have been well trained and, despite not being happy, will still comply with commands even from a stranger. You get to see which dogs are perfectly friendly but have clearly never been taught a basic command in their lives. You get to see which dogs absolutely LOVE being in such a dog-filled environment and don’t seem to give two hoots about their owners not being there. You get to see other people’s dogs behaving in all manners of ways.

In all of this, I can safely say the type of BREED happens to be utterly, utterly irrelevant in relation to how the dog reacts to this environment. No two Dobermans act the same, no two German Shepherds react the same way and you’ll find you’re just as likely to get a bite from a Labrador or a Border Collie as you are from a Rottweiler or a Bull breed.

The most dangerous dog I EVER encountered was, as it happens, a Border Collie.

My (now) wife called me to let me know that a dog had come in the quarantine kennels but he was actually a boarder rather than a quarantined dog.

She told me the dog was launching itself at kennel staff from his kennel and that nobody had been able to get close to entering his kennel. (Bear in mind, these are experienced kennel staff, used to working with many different dogs in a quarantine environment).

I was asked whether I could come over and take a look at the dog and see if I could get in to his kennel and calm him down and get him to be a bit happier and a little less bitey.

A Border Collie? I thought. How bad can it be?

Jumping at the chance to act the hero, I drove over and went to see the dog.

Firstly, this was the largest Border Collie I’ve ever seen. He was (intact male) easily bigger than the Rottweiler I currently own. He was big and he was very, very (VERY) hostile.

Just walking up to his kennel, he flung himself to the front, made himself big and gave a display that could not be mistaken for anything other than extreme territorial aggression.

He was in a confined space and he wanted everyone to know that, if you entered it, he’d be willing to bite. Not just nip and retreat, bite, bite and bite some more. To say he meant business would be an understatement.

I spent a lot of time trying all manner of approaches. I tried the friendly approach. The food through the kennel approach. The pick a ball up and see if that interested him approach. The submissive approach. The assertive approach. The downright hostile approach. I tried everything I knew – and I have worked with a number of rehabilitation case dogs who were very aggressive – but absolutely nothing worked. This was a dog that would not be subdued, at all.

I admitted I couldn’t really help in terms of getting close with the dog and advised that, for the duration of his short stay at the kennels, the staff would be best advised to use the built in, sliding kennel partition so as to ensure the dog was never allowed to come in to contact with a person.

I’ve worked with more than 2,000 dogs and would like to think I have a reasonably fair ability at calling a dog’s personality. I’ll confidently go on record and say that I believe this dog had the capacity to kill. He REALLY meant business.

But here’s where the story reaches its point.

When that dog’s owner came to collect him, he turned in to the soppiest, most playful, friendly dog you could ever wish to meet. He just melted. His tail wagged, his ears set back, his hostile “I’ll kill you if you so much as come within an inch of my kennel” personality just dissolved. As fast as that. The SECOND his owner came for him, he changed.

Was he a dangerous dog?

Well, I think I already called that. He WAS the most dangerous dog I ever met. Ever. UNTIL his owner turned up, whereupon he instantly became a different dog. His personality changed like the flick of a switch.

Did he have the capacity to attack and seriously injure (possibly kill) someone? I have absolutely NO doubt that he did. But again, there’s a caveat – he became a snarling, hostile dog when his owner was not there and he found himself confronted by people he didn’t know. WHEN his owner was there, he’d lie on his back to have his belly tickled by all. What a nice dog, you’d think. But a more accurate way of putting it would be; what a nice, friendly dog (when his owner’s around), what a completely unhinged, dangerous creature (when his owner wasn’t about).

We’ve lost 6 children in under 5 years to dog attack in the UK. We must all agree, that’s 6 too many.

In ALL cases, circumstance was far, far more pertinent than the ‘type’ of owner or even the ‘type’ of dog.

What is missing is education and awareness. A distinct lack of understanding as to the risks associated with unattended dogs, children and an owner not present.

Whilst we have constant debates about so-called ‘status dogs’ and trying to define a breed as being dangerous based entirely on what that breed happens to look like or who its parents were, we can – tragically – expect more of the same. More deaths, more ignorance – and that’s ignorance condoned by the Government.

As a nation, we must surely accept that we would ALL be better off if dog owners were more dog aware.

Not *some* owners. Not certain *types* of owners or owners of certain *types* of dogs, all dog owners. If all dog owners knew more about dogs and what makes dogs dogs, we’d benefit. All of us. Dog owner or not.

What we have here is a people problem, not a dog problem. People who are not fully aware of how dogs brains work.

Dogs CAN grow up with children and be an exceptionally positive influence on youngsters, but a simple lack of awareness about what circumstances can lead to tragedies as a result of dogs doing what dogs are capable of doing is what’s costing youngsters their very existence on this planet and it is wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Our current law doesn’t work.

The question is, will the Government be intelligent enough to recognise that fiddling around the edges of a bad law will not provide the answers we need? That focussing on ‘types’ of owners or dogs won’t prevent deaths? Or that the problem of ‘killer’ dogs is by no means confined to the mean streets of the UK, but – in fact – is most likely to manifest itself in a family home with a family dog, being cared for by grandma whilst the dog owner happens to be somewhere else.

This isn’t what we *think* might be true. This is what we KNOW to be true.

It’s time for the Government to come clean on the DEFRA consultation and acknowledge what the RSPCA have confirmed; that they’ve already made their mind up regarding key aspects of dangerous dogs legislation.

No breed bans.
No BSL.
No BS!

Education is the answer.